Leaks in the press about reduction in send spending

[Perzival]

I haven't seen a thread on this so thought i'd start one.

Over Christmas some newspapers inc the Times and Telegraph have leaked reports that the Government intend to tackle the cost of SEND by only issuing EHCP's to those children with the most severe needs. School's (mainstream) will then be responsible for meeting the needs of those with "moderate" or "minor" (not my wording) needs. Appeals to sendist by parents will be restricted (i'm guessing to those who still have an EHCP) and schools will have to liase with the LA regarding the needs of the other children requiring support.

To avoid drip feeding, my ds has severe/complex needs and attends special school, he'll never be able to live alone....

I have really mixed feelings about this. The current system is causing some LA's to go bankrupt, schools are already massively underfunded, lack of special school places, time it takes for tribunal and don't have the specialisms required but i also see huge waste like the removal of LA owned transport in preference for taxi contracts, the cost of inde provision (not disputing need but wish there was a way for thatto be provided locally by LA's without the profit margin) and the cost to families for professional reports from inde speacialists for tribunal / section f- provision.

If this goes ahead what will happen to the kids who will be failed? What impact will it have on the kids without send in classes with more children with unmet send? If something doesn't change where will the money come from for send with some LA's already blamimg SEND for bankrupsy?

I'm not looking for a discussong rather than an argument. The SEND groups can be an echo chambre so looking for different views.

https://www.specialneedsjungle.com/leaks-denials-fake-conversations-not-inspire-parental-confidence-send/?fbclid=Iwb21leAPInu5jbGNrA8iej2V4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHrItacXo4jijUu3mrF_32165ExI-sVCsVWcUNjc49IsMqP3NOT7kEg3neK8j_aem_AOqVBm2C3Uk7R5u6D-3GIw

Ffs, I knew the figures were bad, but not that bad!

im not aware of any research into outcomes. I’m working from my own experience, one of my sons is very academic but had such a traumatic school experience that even learning is very hard for him at the moment and without some very serious therapeutic intervention I can’t see him getting to a place where employment of any type would be an option. I was aware that employment statistics for those with autism (2 of my children) but didn’t realise that it was across the board 5% for those with learning disability

Having children with send is a very long and painful drip feed. I wish they’d rip the plaster off at diagnosis and tell us what to expect so we can come to terms with it!

It isn’t just about being employed or not. (Although those able to do supported internships, which aren’t suitable for all with SEN, do have a higher rate of employment. I’m not sure of the latest figures, but when SI took off the figures were something like 60-70% secured employment at the end with 1 in 4 being in full-time employment a year after the end of the course.)

For example:
It can be the difference between needing a residential placement or not.
It can be the difference between contact with the justice system or not.
It can be the difference between requiring 2:1 support in the community or only 1:1 support as an adult.
Or the difference between 24/7 support and support for only part of the time.

When you hit 18 years of age around here a lot of people transition out of education into social care packages (even though ehcps run to 25, but there arent many places offering education at that stage) but i havent really seen these being cheaper. I've seen children transition out of full time education at a maintained special school, to part time care arrangements that cost more.

DS2 was language delayed and socially and somewhat physically delayed. So the school requested EP assessment expecting LD. Turned out he had ability on 99th percentile. They still left him at the back of the class doodling so he didn’t disrupt others.

Autism and ADHD diagnosis and decent ECHP (following tribunal) meant that he received a bespoke package for internet school and support in 6th form (maths, further maths and physics with 2 A stars and 1 A) and at uni through DSA where he is studying mechanical engineering.

This was down to parental support to allow him to reach his potential. Parents need the legal right to advocate for their DC - especially in a failing system.

Schools and teachers and the LA are not concerned with the future cost to the state, the young person or wider family. Schools resist cheap provision, LAs spend a fortune blocking provision and then paying barristers to defend cases they are bound to lose. And then end up paying indi fees and transport because there is no in county provision.

MS would not have worked for DS2 - he was constantly told off and was to be placed in lower achieving sets because that’s what where TAs were. He was too high achieving for special school which limited GCSE.. His social and behavioural problems ruled out private indi even with an EHCP. But private online worked for him (with me as unpaid LSA). Parents need choice.

My son had an EHCP. It meant he could access more tailored provision. However he now has 24/7 care. An education programme no matter how good will not reduce the need for 2:1 care or 1:1 care in the community. You cannot teach individuals with genetic disorders to function effectively enough to not need support as an adult.

To add to this excellent list, there will be even more shortages of workers in education and healthcare, because very often a child out of education means a mum who is forced out of work. Especially when physical presence at work is crucial.

And the government will wonder why, and employers will wonder why they can't retain women in their 30s or 40s.

And we will say DUH!

This is interesting. I'm well aware that this is the case, as a teacher, and the attitudes of staff and management make such a difference too.

I wouldn't have needed an EHCP if I could have got unbiased, detailed advice on schools in my Borough that could meet the needs of my AuDHD child.

I couldn't get it. The LA wouldn't engage with me at all.

I therefore felt forced to get the EHCP so I could choose a school in a neighbouring Borough that I knew could meet her needs.

I was so worried about the year 6 to 7 transition going wrong

Of course it isn't all about employment but we currently don't have a system sophisticated enough to understand what 'education' should actually look like for different people and how this can be delivered to make a meaningful difference at a reasonable price for people with SEN.

There also seems to be a blind acceptance that sending SEN kids on long expensive tax journeys that they often find hard and distressing to be 'educated' is in their best interest and it is assumed that it makes the difference when we actually have no idea whether it does or doesn't in the medium/long term. Lots of private specialist schools focus too much on managing the child and prioritise wellbeing over actual skill development. Of course it's a difficult thing to balance but institutions like this don't necessarily impact a child's long term need for care or their ability to live independently as an adult.

I'm not sure anyone thinks the long taxi journeys are in anyone's interest, except the owners of the taxi companies, but the LAs left themselves with no other option due to the closure of so many special schools.

As much as not everyone can do this the VAT imposition is an absolute idiocy.

If someone can just about afford to get a better environment for their dc so they can access education they will push for it if it’s a priority.

Cutting off that option is madness. Absolute bloody madness. No one else does this.

we currently don't have a system sophisticated enough to understand what 'education' should actually look like for different people

We do. This is what the EHCNA is about. The problem is LAs often fail to conduct EHCNAs as they should be undertaken.

There also seems to be a blind acceptance that sending SEN kids on long expensive tax journeys that they often find hard and distressing to be 'educated' is in their best interest

There isn’t. Parents don’t go into long journeys to school lightly. Parents are forced into placements involving long journeys when there isn’t a closer suitable alternative. If there was a suitable alternative, the LA would refuse to provide transport. There are maximum recommended travel times, but some have to travel further. Journeys should also be non-stressful, which is why some receive individual transport rather than shared, but some find journeys stressful no matter what, which is one reason some have EOTAS/EOTIS/C packages.

I think with the LA vs inde/ non maintained schools the issue is that many of the LA's special schools are usually mixed dx and ability. The ones i saw when looking for my son were more like holding pens (my words). One school had a group of mclaren buggies lined up outside the class, in my naivety i asked about the amount of physical disabilities vs comms vs behaviour. The class was a majority autism class, they put them in the buggies when they wanted to keep them still (this was over ten years ago when looking for primary). when viewing secondary the local sen school had clip locks high up on the doors to "stop the runners" and when asked about a certain aac a teacher pulled a device out of a draw that was out of power, this was the yp's voice.

Local sen provision like mainstream isn't funded well enough to give the specialism required. Parents who end up fightingat tribunal won't settle for this type of setting so the journey is worth it.

My ds won't end up paying taxes and when me and dh are no longer here he will take much more from the system than he does now. His school has taught him valuable life skills which will reduce that cost. LA 's should be providing this kind of level of support/ education but there isn't the S school places available for demand.

I would like to see a cap on the amount of profit these schools are allowed to make, a max charge per pupil depending on provision and where the companies/ organisations disagree and want to sell out a compulsary purchase with them being run non for profit but that is my day dream and i'm aware highly unlikely to happen. This doesn't change the need for more special schools especially if these plans go ahead.

@Perzival despite more SS places being needed, the building of some SS has been recently scrapped.

The government are using the opportunity to cancel funding for already planned new special schools.

There is no way this plays out as leaked, without it becoming much more difficult to get a special school place.

46 free schools scrapped and 59 special schools in limbo https://share.google/Ct8HKq12S9MA6GhKS

I know it's scandalous, i think i read the funding was being moved to the mainstreams for the units discussed? I'm asking as i'm not 100%

That's what they SAY but I doubt it will be ringfenced, or even realistically could be ringfenced.

School budgets per pupil have been falling in real terms for around 15 years now so any extra money will just disappear into leaky clapped out buildings, because all the other money will go into unfunded pay increases.

It really is a shit show. I'm so glad my non sen older kid is at uni. If i was a parent of a kid in mainstream i'd be incredibly worried at what this means (whether send parent or not) and i am worried as a parent of a kid in special.

Yep I’m glad two of mine are through.

You seem to be purposely taking my posts out of context. The system is not sophisticated enough to understand what 'education' should actually look like when it needs to be delivered at a reasonable cost. Omitting that bit of the sentence is hugely relevant. This is large reason why LAs are reluctant to undertake EHCNAs as they then will be on the hook to deliver the identified support irrespective of the often enormous and completely unsustainable price tag. It is completely unrealistic to be blind to the cost of SEN when other essential services are under mounting cost pressures. We have cancer and dementia patients being denied treatment and life extending drugs. What about their needs? Surely we need to be cost conscious in all areas?

The point about the long journeys to acceptable alternatives is more nuanced than you suggest. I'm not saying parents or the LA are opting for these long journeys as a first resort , but that once specific and often quite difficult to meet needs have been identified then often the only option for kids is to send them miles away to a provider than can meet them. This happened to my relative and it is now clear that this wasn't really in his best interest. The long journey was very difficult for him and the benefit from attending that particular college now seems very questionable indeed even though ostensibly it was the best way to meet his needs at the time.

They're not really "on the hook" though. They very frequently don't provide the services/support or don't pay, and there's no easy way to challenge them and there's hardly ever any sort of sanction. LAs can essentially do what they like.

I'm always fascinated when people recommend EOTAS. In my LA you get nothing funded even after tribunal, getting anything in place can take years and if you do it's off to panel several times a year for funding approval.

You seem to be purposely taking my posts out of context.

No, I’m not taking your posts out of context.

Costs aren’t the focus because the starting point is what provision is required to meet needs. Costs are only considered if 2 provisions can both meet needs. Then, they are already considered.

often the only option for kids is to send them miles away to a provider than can meet them.

Which is exactly what I said. It really isn’t more nuanced than I said. If there was somewhere closer that could meet needs, these DC would be attending that school or the LA would not have a transport duty.

We have cancer and dementia patients being denied treatment and life extending drugs. What about their needs?

And this is far more nuanced than you suggest. I know this firsthand because I have DC on medication for a LLI that took a lot of campaigning for which people died or were only given the drug on compassionate use when very unwell because most couldn’t afford to buy it abroad. The company who make the drugs were/are playing God globally by being greedy (and yes it was/is greed, they’d rather dispose of expired drugs rather than see them used). The government wasn't squeaky clean, either. They could have invoked Crown use licensing or given direct health budgets for the drugs and made it easier to import the drugs. They could have relooked at how decisions on QALYs are more.

I'm always fascinated when people recommend EOTAS. In my LA you get nothing funded even after tribunal

Good EOTAS/EOTIS packages can be secured in any LA. If LAs are refusing to fund provision Ordered by Tribunal those parents should look at JR. But EOTAS/EOTIS is only legally possible when it is inappropriate for provision to be made in a school or college, so school/college isn’t an option for those needing EOTAS/EOTIS.

If the problem is SENDIST hasn’t Ordered the provision required the parents should check if they have grounds to challenge the first-tier tribunal’s decision. That won’t be possible for all, or maybe not even any. When they next have the right of appeal to SENDIST, they could appeal again and make sure their evidence is strong. SENDIST can’t Order things there isn’t evidence for.

A lot of it is ‘SEHM’ - children who are anxious, angry, refuse to go to school, make threats to harm themselves. They are then diagnosed as ND but I don’t think it quite explains it personally. Somethings changed in children, or their environment, I would love to know what.